High court upholds doctors’ rightful pay, slams Punjab for arbitrary actions

Doctors deserve respect and their rightful pay under the law, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled, while upholding a single judge’s decision granting assistant professors their due pay scales in accordance with the Punjab Medical Education (Group-A) Service Rules of 2016.

The division bench of Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal and Justice Lapita Banerji also rapped the state of Punjab for capricious and irrational action before dismissing its appeal, challenging the single bench order that directed compliance with the rules in the matter of pay scales.

“It is apt to notice that the arbitrary and unreasonable action of the state has compelled the doctors to knock the portals of this court. The doctors ought to be treated with respect and dignity and given their lawful dues under the rules,” the bench asserted.

The court affirmed that the respondents, appointed as assistant professor, were entitled to the pay scales specified in the 2016 Rules. It rejected the state’s argument that the advertisement and appointment letters, which offered lower pay, were binding on the respondents. The bench noted that executive instructions could not override statutory provisions.

“Merely because in the advertisement/appointment letters, the state had prescribed a lower pay scale, the same cannot come in the way of the respondents seeking the enforcement of their lawful rights. It is trite that the executive instructions cannot override statutory rules,” the bench asserted

The court was of the view that proper course required to be adopted was the amendment of the rules, in case the state’s intention was to provide “another or lower pay scales”. “There is no dispute that the rules have not been amended. Executive instructions would have the force of law only in the absence of statutory rules or to fill the gaps in the statutory rules, which is not there in the case at hand,” the court observed.

The judgment is significant as it says any deviation from the statutory pay scales require amending the rules—a process the state failed to undertake. Citing precedents, the court reiterated that statutory provisions must prevail over statements in advertisements in cases of conflict.

The litigation arose after the doctors, appointed under the 2016 Rules, were denied the prescribed pay scales of Rs 37,400 to 67,000 with grade pay of Rs 8,600. The bench was told that the state had issued executive instructions to apply lower central pay scales, which the respondents challenged successfully before the single bench.

Before parting with the order, the division bench upheld the single bench’s decision, which termed the state’s action arbitrary and directed compliance with the 2016 Rules. The appeal, delayed by 40 days, was admitted but ultimately dismissed for lacking merit.